[Rail Paul]

Eater has a book release today reminding would be chefs that most people don't start out in Kitchen Stadium, or on the set of Chopped. Or, hanging with the Obamas or a hip-hop group. Like any job, it requires hard work, low pay for a while, a lot of long hours, and some luck. That's the part that's often left out in the FoodNetwork, etc profiles.

Oh, and be prepared to work for free as part of your skills development...

But while the profession certainly has been glamorized a lot in the media over the past few years, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that the job requires a lot of skill, long, grueling hours, and sometimes less than adequate pay. For anyone considering a culinary future, a book will be released soon by the president of the Institute of Culinary Education that sheds some light on just how much money chefs make. Nation's Restaurant News got an advance copy of the new book, Culinary Careers, and has leaked some of the salary statistics.

How much money

[Rail Paul]

The NY Times picks up on this story, with an expansion to various trade schools offering certificates in electronics, computer repair, cheffing and others. With tuition in the $20,000 a year range, the potential for misrepresentation and outright theft is becoming more obvious.

Le Cordon Bleu is used as the lead-in picture for the article. The wide spread availability of Pell grants, military assistance, etc encourages students to load up on loans, to be paid back with the wealth from their new jobs as chefs, interior decorators, electronics experts, etc. That rarely happens.

One chef, interviewed for the article, says the culinary education is just a duplication of what you learn on the job.

In some cases, these programs duplicate what may be offered in high school programs. Dee's nephew took auto shop classes in high school, transferring to the county technical school for his final year. He now works for a large regional car dealership, and recently bought his first house at age 22. He's in good financial shape, with money in the bank, and a decent future.

The Obama administration is considering rules which would require schools to show students the costs of their education, and their likely change in earning power with the new certificate.

The administration is also tightening regulations to ensure that vocational schools that receive aid dollars prepare students for “gainful employment.” Under a proposal being floated by the Department of Education, programs would be barred from loading students with more debt than justified by the likely salaries of the jobs they would pursue.

“During a recession, with increased demand for education and more anxiety about the ability to get a job, there is a heightened level of hazard,” said Robert Shireman, a deputy under secretary of education. “There is a lot of Pell grant money out there, and we need to make sure it’s being used effectively.”

The administration’s push has provoked fierce lobbying from the for-profit educational industry, which is seeking to maintain flexibility in the rules.

Schools

Enrollment at for-profit trade schools expanded about 20 percent a year the last two years, more than double the pace from 2001-7, according to the Career College Association.

Mr. Miller, the association’s president, said for-profit schools were securing large numbers of Pell grants because their financial aid offices were diligent and because the schools served many low-income students.

But financial aid experts say the surge of federal money reaching such institutions reflects something else: their aggressive, sometimes deceitful recruiting practices.

Jeffrey West was working at a pet store near Philadelphia, earning about $8 an hour, when he saw advertisements for training programs offered by WyoTech, a chain of trade schools owned by Corinthian Colleges Inc., a publicly traded company that last year reported revenue of $1.3 billion.

After Mr. West called the school, an admissions representative drove to his house to sell him on classes in auto body refinishing and upholstering technology, a nine-month program that cost about $30,000.

Mr West now earns $12 an hour, and is having trouble paying his $30,000 in loans

[Anthony Bonner]

for profit education is a scam predicating on abusing educational lending programs and stealing from taxpayers. Why "conservatives" are such proponents of it boggles the mind.

If/When Mr. West defaults on his loans it's the taxpayer who is on the hook - they are government guaranteed. One of the first numbers these businesses disclose in the filings is student default rate - why? because if it's too high they lose their access to government insured lending, and if that goes the business is essentially closed. Every study ever done has shown community colleges do the same job better for much much less.

[yvonne johnson]

Even public universities are for profit (in the broadest sense of the word), no? Milking students to the hilt.

[Anthony Bonner]

Even public universities are for profit (in the broadest sense of the word), no? Milking students to the hilt.

can you name a school that makes money teaching undergrads? Some professional schools are moneymakers but that's it. Of course that's neither here nor there. If for-profit schools were not scams losing the federal guarantee wouldn't matter because on average the graduates would be able to pay off the loans at a rate similar to grads from other schools. Its not even that the education is bad it's that it is really expensive compared to non-profit community colleges.

It seems obvious that tertiary education in the US is too expensive but that's a separate issue from the for-profit schools. The pro for-profit school argument is that the market would force them to be better and cheaper than state-supported institutions but the existence of student loan guarantees is massive externality that these guys just abuse.

ETA: Default rate data http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/defaultma.../instrates.html

[Rail Paul]

(snip)

It seems obvious that tertiary education in the US is too expensive but that's a separate issue from the for-profit schools. The pro for-profit school argument is that the market would force them to be better and cheaper than state-supported institutions but the existence of student loan guarantees is massive externality that these guys just abuse.

ETA: Default rate data http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/defaultma.../instrates.html

Dee's nephew, mentioned upthread, got an excellent education in high school / tech school at a very reasonable price (free). Put him on a path toward a decent income and professional growth in auto body repair / auto maintenance. At age 19, his first job paid him something like $25 an hour plus all the OT he wanted. That was a few years ago. His sister is in an electrician's apprentice program as a senior in HS, working 15 hours a week for good money. She'll do just fine.

FWIW, I think the two biggest problems are too many high school kids on "college track" programs who don't want to be there, and too few people in good, well constructed trades programs. Some colleges have 50% or more freshmen in remedial programs. You just know most of those kids will be gone, soon.

[ghostrider]

When I see this thread title, I wonder: where is Cheffing? Is it near East Dorking? South of Basingstoke?

[mongo_jones]

Even public universities are for profit (in the broadest sense of the word), no? Milking students to the hilt.

can you name a school that makes money teaching undergrads?

are you talking about research universities? because liberal arts colleges make a lot of money teaching only undergraduates. the bigger names are driven by their endowments but the smaller ones are highly reliant on tuition.

[Rail Paul]

Even public universities are for profit (in the broadest sense of the word), no? Milking students to the hilt.

can you name a school that makes money teaching undergrads?

are you talking about research universities? because liberal arts colleges make a lot of money teaching only undergraduates. the bigger names are driven by their endowments but the smaller ones are highly reliant on tuition.

Put 200 undergrads in a big room. Put a $25 an hour grad student in the front, teaching. Collect a few thou per credit hour from each of the undergrads. Remember to pay the heat and light bills.

Sounds like a great way to mint money for the university...

[Ron Johnson]

FWIW, I think the two biggest problems are too many high school kids on "college track" programs who don't want to be there, and too few people in good, well constructed trades programs. Some colleges have 50% or more freshmen in remedial programs. You just know most of those kids will be gone, soon.

This is a good point. This mindset has played a large role in our loss of manufacturing jobs in this country. It's a lot easier to ship manufacturing jobs overseas if we pretend that our educational system is designed to put every kid into a white collar job. Germany has long recognized that some students simply have an aptitude for building and fixing things. This is recognized and those students are channeled away from traditional education and encouraged to learn a trade where they can utilize their skills. As a result we all know about the quality of german made products.

[Anthony Bonner]

Even public universities are for profit (in the broadest sense of the word), no? Milking students to the hilt.

can you name a school that makes money teaching undergrads?

are you talking about research universities? because liberal arts colleges make a lot of money teaching only undergraduates. the bigger names are driven by their endowments but the smaller ones are highly reliant on tuition.

revenue is not equal to profit. For example my alma mater which has professional schools but is not a research school - ran an operating loss of about 15 mil on 1 billion in revenue, only 60% of the revenue came from tuition and fees - and this is a school where tuition is pretty close to the top of the tables. And don't forget this includes a large business school and law school - both of which are quite profitable. There is probably about 50 mil of debt service in there, but still clearly not making money teaching undergrads.

As another example I looked at an elite rural liberal arts school - they generated 100 mil of their 125 in revenues from student fees and tuition. Their direct costs are in excess of their revenues. To put an even finer point on it this school generates 75 in tuition and 76 mil in salaries and wages - so even before you take into account the cost of the facilites they are having to use the endowment - and this is a school that no one would say has financial issues

[mongo_jones]

As another example I looked at an elite rural liberal arts school - they generated 100 mil of their 125 in revenues from student fees and tuition. Their direct costs are in excess of their revenues. To put an even finer point on it this school generates 75 in tuition and 76 mil in salaries and wages - so even before you take into account the cost of the facilites they are having to use the endowment - and this is a school that no one would say has financial issues

yeah, but elite schools are, as i said, far more endowment driven. for this reason smaller schools were not hit as hard by the 30-40% hits that elite endowments took in the last 18 months. but an enrollment drop of 10 students can be dire. perhaps still not making profit on student fees/costs but much more important to the bottom line.

[g.johnson]

Endowments can be very, very large. So it may be a deliberate decision to subsidize students who, if you choose good ones*, will subsequently add to the endowment.

*I.e., ones whose parents are immensely rich.**
** Joke.

[yvonne johnson]

Even public universities are for profit (in the broadest sense of the word), no? Milking students to the hilt.

can you name a school that makes money teaching undergrads? Some professional schools are moneymakers but that's it. Of course that's neither here nor there. If for-profit schools were not scams losing the federal guarantee wouldn't matter because on average the graduates would be able to pay off the loans at a rate similar to grads from other schools. Its not even that the education is bad it's that it is really expensive compared to non-profit community colleges.

It seems obvious that tertiary education in the US is too expensive but that's a separate issue from the for-profit schools. The pro for-profit school argument is that the market would force them to be better and cheaper than state-supported institutions but the existence of student loan guarantees is massive externality that these guys just abuse.

ETA: Default rate data http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/defaultma.../instrates.html

I didn't state my case very well.

The thing about post-secondary education in the US that bothers me is that students are "consumers" paying for their education. Who takes the money?

As you suggest, professional schools "pay" for many universities' existence. Pity the classics or philosophy.

[Orik]

are you talking about research universities? because liberal arts colleges make a lot of money teaching only undergraduates. the bigger names are driven by their endowments but the smaller ones are highly reliant on tuition.

liberal arts students are much cheaper than real students, aren't they? iirc the numbers in my school were that they were making 50%-75% profit on tuition on liberal arts and losing 75% or more on science and engineering.